Welcome

Welcome to the POZ Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

Author
Topic: Your Mother Liked It Bareback (Read 22906 times)

I thought some may find this article interesting. I often feel there is a huge double standard. But, I often feel the double standard is fair. Given the stats of infection, stats on the number of partners, and how anal sex is the greatest risk, perhaps the double standard is fair?

Thing is, anal tissues are not as thick or robust as vaginal tissues. The walls of the vagina are very thick in comparison to the walls of the anus - an analogy of the anal canal being lined with a piece of paper and the vagina being lined with bricks would not be unfair. The reason behind this is that the vagina must be able to stretch to accommodate a baby's head, while the anus must only stretch to accommodate a large turd (MUCH smaller than a baby's head).

The difference in thickness is part of what makes anal sex more risky than vaginal sex. The thinness of the anal walls makes it more likely that damage will occur. And with damage comes ruptured blood vessels (even if only on a microscopic level in the capillaries) and a direct route for hiv to come into contact with the correct type of cells it can infect. Even topping in anal sex is a bit more risky because of the likelihood of blood being involved.

If the vagina were as delicate and easily damaged as the rectal canal, women would die in childbirth far more often than they do. Successful childbirth would be a rarity rather than the norm.

Please don't read this as a rant against anal sex. I'm partial to a bit of anal myself - but I do what I can to minimise any damage by making sure it's something I want to participate in at the time and making sure we use plenty of lube. Yes, that's right. Straight folks engage in anal sex too. Gay men can't have all the fun!

But the fact remains that you cannot equate anal sex with vaginal sex when talking about hiv risk. The physiology is too different. Sure, we're reducing the sex act to mechanics when we look at it this way, but it's the facts.

Something that I've always said - I ended up living with hiv because I did something that pretty much every other adult on the planet has done at some time in their lives; I had unprotected intercourse. When you put it in that perspective, it's no different to doing anything else that most people have done, like walking around barefoot. I refuse to be demonised because of it.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

No one would ever expect a straight person to use a condom for sex 100% of the time. Yet gay men, even those in a committed relationship, are expected to always use a condom. The term "bareback", which is a bit derogatory, is almost exclusively used to refer to gay men having condomless sex. One example of this comes to mind which is how we classify pornography. Gay porn where people don't wear condoms is categorized as "bareback" porn, straight porn where they don't use condoms is simply referred to as "straight porn."

Its not just straight people that are holding gay men to a standard that cannot be realistically achieved. Gay men do it also. Many times on this forum, when someone asks a question regarding HIV transmission, the low/no risk of transmission when the positive partner has an undetectable viral load is often ignored and the advise tends to go back to 100% condom usage (which is unrealistic). There was a recent study (im not at a place where I can post the link) that showed among 200 or so serodisordant couples when the positive partner had an undetectable viral load there were NO transmissions. The HPTN 052 study which showed the 96% reduction, the study that's always referenced regarding transmission, only had 1 case of HIV transmission and it occurred before the positive partner had gone undetectable. >>In fact the study was ended years early because the results were so convincing that being UD is a great way to reduce HIV transmission<<

Instead of giving practical advise on transmission reduction which very well should include condomless sex when the positive partner is UD, we fall back on 100% condom usage all ways all the time.

ALSO.....this is a bit personal and probably the most important part of my rant. When you expect an entire class of people to always use a condom, and the individual fails (which as we all know from first hand experience happens all the time) that person is made to feel like.....well a failure. Like they deserved what they got. I personally refuse to accept that.

One example of this comes to mind which is how we classify pornography. Gay porn where people don't wear condoms is categorized as "bareback" porn, straight porn where they don't use condoms is simply referred to as "straight porn."

There is a historical reason for this but you probably don't get the context being a decade or more younger than I am.

When doing risk assessment or guiding people towards safer sex I feel its not a double standard to include condoms into the advice . If you put aside monogamous couples , condoms are the gold standard in protection .

You simply cannot trust a persons claim that a UD viral load is a constant or a fact . I see that the UD aspect is mentioned quite often when discussing risk and safer sex on this board when its appropriate , monogamy or other wise .

You can't trust that someone is monogamous really either, especially if you met last month and moved in together the second month.

Exactly . I can point to studies about transmission risk and UD viral loads but I cant in good conscious leave condoms out of the discussion all together when asked about safer sex in any of the conversations .

What people choose in the context of a relationship after they understand the variables is their own business and choice .

You can't trust that someone is monogamous really either, especially if you met last month and moved in together the second month.

That IS a difficulty in safer sex/HIV education - and it isn't always relegated to people who meet in January and marry by March. The assumption that one's partner/spouse is A)being sexually monogamous and B) if not, is being sexually careful outside the relationship has, I imagine, brought a great many people here.

I have been trumpeting the UD/condom negotiable situation for a while now, but I maintain that it's only effective in relationships where trust is appropriately placed.

Ann was/is entirely correct that anal sex is NOT entirely equivalent to vaginal sex. And thirty years into the pandemic, I have yet to see any large scale male/male serodiscordant couples' studies. Money routinely is funneled from other, more palatable outreach destinations to surreptitiously fund MSM outreach here in the states, because few governmental agencies want to be seen promoting "gay" sex, or "promiscuous" sex. Until such time as that changes (AIDS will be over) I cannot imagine huge, steady funding for MSM serodiscordant couples' studies. Not in the states at any rate.

The couple is exclusiveThe couple only has anal sex when the receptive partner is ready/ableThere are no other active infections present in the positive partnerThe positive partner is adherent to meds and is getting regular viral load testingThe sex is relatively gentle, with plenty of lubeThe positive partner is bottoming

-then a persistent UD level in the blood seems to be a good indicator that condom-free sex is at most a passing risk similar to that found in condom use. Any deviation from that list ups the risks of infection - though without study we simply cannot know how much. And maybe it's not even possible, given the diversity of human nature.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

The walls of the vagina are very thick in comparison to the walls of the anus - an analogy of the anal canal being lined with a piece of paper and the vagina being lined with bricks would not be unfair. The reason behind this is that the vagina must be able to stretch to accommodate a baby's head, while the anus must only stretch to accommodate a large turd (MUCH smaller than a baby's head).

Is there a Paragraph of the Week award. I think you win. Though in all fairness, we haven't actually seen the turd in question.

Something that I've always said - I ended up living with hiv because I did something that pretty much every other adult on the planet has done at some time in their lives; I had unprotected intercourse. When you put it in that perspective, it's no different to doing anything else that most people have done, like walking around barefoot. I refuse to be demonised because of it. edited for clarity

As I've begun to be more open with people about the fact that I likely contracted HIV the old fashioned way – via needle in a dirty hotel room – I'm discovering that many people do rank us in terms of compassion/sympathy since compassion is a limited and nonrenewable resource that can't be squandered. Facetiously speaking: "Women who got it from cheating men" are at the top with the hemophiliacs, "gay men who got it from cheating boyfriends" are near the top (in NYC anyway), "gay men who got it from having lots of dirty and/or fun bareback sex" are much lower and "anyone who ever put a needle in their arm even once even just for a minute regardless of how they ended up thinking that would ever be a good idea" is the absolute bottom. I think we rank somewhere down there with Pol Pot. I don't know how you personally feel, but I'm taking your mantra. I refuse to be demonized because of a choice I made while lonely and high (on at least 4 illegal substances) last year. Forgiveness isn't instantaneous, but if we can forgive Michael Vick, we can forgive me.

Interesting thread but I thought we were past a lot of this double-standard and judging folks on how they got teh AIDS. What I find disappointing is that too many folks buy into this "my infection is morally superior to your infection" when they either ask for forgiveness or apologize for how they became poz.

I do not owe anyone any apologies for how I have lived my life. I'm not asking someone else to experience the consequences of my actions, so why do I care what you think of what I "may" have done? Infection-method-sorting to me is incredible insensitive and offensive. Whatever happened to folks just minding their own business, without the need to criticize others over every perceived infraction they may have made in life.

The HPTN 052 study which showed the 96% reduction, the study that's always referenced regarding transmission, only had 1 case of HIV transmission and it occurred before the positive partner had gone undetectable. >>In fact the study was ended years early because the results were so convincing that being UD is a great way to reduce HIV transmission<<

I assumed HPTN 052 was all male/female couples, but it wasn't. I found the whole thing interesting, so I post here the link to the PDF. My PDF reader is being worn out with all these studies.

Among the inclusion criteria: "Couples are defined as sexual partners, same or opposite sex, who are married, have been living together, or consider each other a primary partner."

Unfortunately, MSM (men who have sex with men) have to be careful because results that may apply only to the general population may not apply to us. I direct you to this report from April, 2012 which included commentary from the authors:

Quote

"Politch and his colleagues note that antiretroviral therapy is undoubtedly associated with a reduced risk of HIV transmission during sexual activity. In prefacing their own data, the authors reiterate the results of HPTN 052, which demonstrated that ARV therapy led to a 96 percent reduction in HIV transmission risk among HIV-discordant heterosexual couples, along with a study among MSM conducted over a decade ago concluding that HIV treatment decreases the transmission risk by roughly 60 percent.

Yet, according to the authors, “MSM have experienced a resurgent HIV epidemic in the [ARV treatment] era. Many HIV-infected MSM continue to engage in unsafe sex, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or other factors may promote genital HIV shedding and transmission in this population despite [ARV therapy].”"

I personally have no intention of picking up the condom habit at this late stage in the game, but if and when I ever have sex again, it will be with someone who's positive and feels the same way I do. I really do think, though, that unless you are willing to accept the possibility that you may test positive for HIV, you should always use a condom, regardless of your partners UD-status. I'm not saying "you should use a condom". I'm saying "use a condom if the thought of being HIV-positive freaks you out".

Actually, I'd say "don't have sex unless you're mentally prepared for the possibility of HIV". It's mocked here, but I know someone who was infected via oral sex. In fact I infected him, so I know exactly what was done and not done. This is why I get touchy about the "saliva kills HIV" thing, because mine apparently didn't get that memo and blissfully let the HIV out to play. He's forgiven me, but I haven't forgiven myself. This was one week before my diagnosis, and I'm trying to learn to live with it. It was, after all, the safest encounter I'd had in years. But it does happen. And the consequences are pretty big.

Interesting thread but I thought we were past a lot of this double-standard and judging folks on how they got teh AIDS. What I find disappointing is that too many folks buy into this "my infection is morally superior to your infection" when they either ask for forgiveness or apologize for how they became poz.

I do not owe anyone any apologies for how I have lived my life. I'm not asking someone else to experience the consequences of my actions, so why do I care what you think of what I "may" have done? Infection-method-sorting to me is incredible insensitive and offensive. Whatever happened to folks just minding their own business, without the need to criticize others over every perceived infraction they may have made in life.

Life is simply too short to put up with that crap.

Joe

I am amazed that this standard still exists. It sure as shit doesn't exist here, not so long as I am allowed to post.

That whole hierarchy is such bullshit. It will not thrive here. Will. Not.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

Hey, hey! I'm not recommending it! I dislike it too. It never occurred to me until I was on the receiving end of it, and the "double standard" talk made me think of it. Yikes, my one day back online and I've set off two moderators in a row. I won't mention it again.

Perhaps you're starting to get why I'm quite unpopular, but I really don't do it on purpose.

Hey, hey! I'm not recommending it! I dislike it too. It never occurred to me until I was on the receiving end of it, and the "double standard" talk made me think of it. Yikes, my one day back online and I've set off two moderators in a row. I won't mention it again.

Perhaps you're starting to get why I'm quite unpopular, but I really don't do it on purpose.

You didn't suggest there are better infections over others. You just said what society (gay and straight) thinks. No problem with what you said.

You didn't suggest there are better infections over others. You just said what society (gay and straight) thinks. No problem with what you said.

Exactly. Never occurred to me to make that disclaimer. Thought it was obvious.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

As I've begun to be more open with people about the fact that I likely contracted HIV the old fashioned way – via needle in a dirty hotel room – I'm discovering that many people do rank us in terms of compassion/sympathy since compassion is a limited and nonrenewable resource that can't be squandered. Facetiously speaking: "Women who got it from cheating men" are at the top with the hemophiliacs, "gay men who got it from cheating boyfriends" are near the top (in NYC anyway), "gay men who got it from having lots of dirty and/or fun bareback sex" are much lower and "anyone who ever put a needle in their arm even once even just for a minute regardless of how they ended up thinking that would ever be a good idea" is the absolute bottom. I think we rank somewhere down there with Pol Pot.

You get that judgement from fellow New Yorkers? That's a pity. If you feel like being generous you could challenge a few of these ignoramuses. Or ignore them...

I remember that hierarchy but it seems very 90's to me... I know it still exists. But nobody has EVER said any such thing to my face...

There have been public education campaigns in Switzerland about stigma and about how HIV is an equal opportunity pest....

« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 12:23:11 AM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Perhaps you're starting to get why I'm quite unpopular, but I really don't do it on purpose.

You are not and have never been unpopular. What you seem to be is paranoid. We were actually affirming this as a safe place for you. Just like I was trying to do before.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

A good portion of the people presenting in I just tested HIV have baggage like this. It is what it is. Most HIV+ people eventually move into "a virus has no morals" territory but some people, that judgement-free zone doesn't really fit their world views...

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Hey, hey! I'm not recommending it! I dislike it too. It never occurred to me until I was on the receiving end of it, and the "double standard" talk made me think of it. Yikes, my one day back online and I've set off two moderators in a row. I won't mention it again.

Perhaps you're starting to get why I'm quite unpopular, but I really don't do it on purpose.

You are not unpopular, but I agree with Jonathan that you appear to be very paranoid and afraid of making any perceived waves. It's a forum to exchange ideas, be supportive, HAVE FUN and if you really offend someone, don't worry most of the members will tell you so.

If it makes you feel better, I have made bigger fuck ups in my life than you have and nobody here cares. We are not here to judge you in any way, shape or form. You have an incredibly strong constitution, great wit and a depraved sense of humour, so what's not to like? Stop worrying about offending folks and just keep being you, because we do like what we see.

I remember that hierarchy but it seems very 90's to me... I know it still exists. But nobody has EVER said any such thing to my face...

There have been public education campaigns in Switzerland about stigma and about how HIV is an equal opportunity pest....

I tend to bring out the worst in people. And lately I decided to just go whole hog and be the poster boy for *this* and I've been obnoxiously open about the whole thing. I mean, not much left to lose at this point, so might as well shovel a path for the next guy who finds himself here. (Not *here* - I mean across the desk from Frau NutChracher at the Health Department, for instance, who has little patience for my type. The next guy won't seem so bad after me!)

I only just realized that your name is "mec ch", as in Swiss guy, not mecch, like some sort of post-modern mechanic. I apologize for my earlier comments on Switzerland and its rather strict laws, but in my defense I had Swiss in-laws and the only word I learned there was "interdit". It seemed magical but with such a long list of rules. I once participated in a dream about an imaginary Lübeck. My part was entirely Swiss. Here's a photo of an average Lübeckian: http://f0.bcbits.com/z/22/05/22059647-1.jpg

Can't you just see her offering you a luscious candy, then snatching it away because you didn't accept it properly?

Muslim students at University of Manchester are "fine" with killing gays for public displays of affection.... http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/‘kill-gays-kissing’-extremist-muslim-tells-manchester-students190213

Some world views are VERY myopic.

There as some hatefilled dimwits in the world...

« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 01:12:36 AM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

It's not paranoia if they're actually coming for you. O_o Anyway, I'm on ART. Paranoia is a side eff...oh shit, that won't work here will it.

Well depending on your regimen (especially if it involves Sustiva) then paranoia is a pretty common side effect when ART containing that drug is given to someone diagnosed with bipolar disorder. For people with Major Depressive Disorder, it an cause intense suicidal ideations, often months after beginning therapy.

There are, of course, a myriad of other things that cause paranoia. ART is one of them. You might not want to listen to me, but you can count on Joe. He is a lot nicer and more diplomatic than I any day of the week.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

I'm not swiss. But. Bingo! Yep mecch = guy in ch Yep Switzerland loves rules but so do many Central European cultures.... It has its advantages and disadvantages....

Ooh, ooh, I can (sort of) tie this into one thread and get back to the label thing. Ahem, so, I'm talking to this guy, let's call him Vaclav. He's telling me of the glories of the Czech people, which is odd. They don't usually talk like that. It's a very Americo-Soviet way of talking, if you know what I mean. He tells me he's glad the Czech Republic has taken back its rightful place as the center of Europe. He uses the word central a lot and explains how much it bothers him that Prague is considered an Eastern European city. He gets a map, it's in the Center see? Can't I see that it's in Central Europe, not Eastern like some Moldovan backwater? Central Europe, ah...it's so nice to be in Central Europe.

All I could think was, "47 years as a Soviet puppet state, and this is what bothers you?" And, yes, it was. The label really mattered. Of course, he was too young to really remember the Soviets at all. Once you forget the actual suffering, it seems all that matters is how they labelled you.

Well depending on your regimen (especially if it involves Sustiva) then paranoia is a pretty common side effect when ART containing that drug is given to someone diagnosed with bipolar disorder. For people with Major Depressive Disorder, it an cause intense suicidal ideations, often months after beginning therapy.

There are, of course, a myriad of other things that cause paranoia. ART is one of them. You might not want to listen to me, but you can count on Joe. He is a lot nicer and more diplomatic than I any day of the week.

Nah, Stribild. But Stribild has no side effects. None. Not one. (Note: that's not true.)

I was terrified of Sustiva, and I hope that by the time I have to switch it won't be an option. I know for some people it's a wonderdrug with few side effects, but the thought alone gives me anxiety, so the drug itself, yikes. I took it for a month for PrEP (hahahahaha) years ago and got a rash after two weeks. Not sure it was the Sustiva, actually, and I don't remember what the other two things were. There were three, and I had to keep one of them in the refrigerator (this was 2004-5). I remember being scared someone would find it, so I had it wrapped up in a bag and buried it in the crisper, which probably made it easier to find. I only remember the Sustiva because the doctor told me to take it then get in bed immediately, don't wait. I had really fun dreams about riding a rainbow of sound (whatever that means), but I'm a much darker person now and would probably dream of werewolf zombies or megasharks.

I took it for a month for PrEP (hahahahaha) years ago and got a rash after two weeks. Not sure it was the Sustiva, actually, and I don't remember what the other two things were.

Sorry - not PrEP, PEP (post-exposure). I had a friend who knew everyone and was very charming. He took me to a place over on the West Side and had it arranged. I don't think this was officially the kind of thing that's supposed to happen, though.

On Grinder last night. Someone popped in, within a few exchanges he said "you want to breed me."

I mentioned that I was undetectable but poz. He flipped out and ran away to the next "negative" dude.

The point is. If I used a condom in every situation, then I wouldn't have been poz. But I slipped. I'm human, I make mistakes. Shit happens.

Ultimately. For the writer to say it's a double standard is BS. Becuase straight people deal with the same issues. As more and more GPS sites are coming online and having casual sex is easier now then ever before ( if that's even possible ). So the deeper issue isn't bareback or no bareback. No one seems to be commissioning a study on OkCupid.

The issue is why so many people constantly and willingly put themselves at risk.

It shocks me to no end the risks people take. They roll the dice. Some win some lose. But I can't help feeling, when the time comes, when we cure AIDS. What will be the next STD that's like it and will take it's place.

I wanted to comment on something that you quoted - but somehow the quote feature doesn't work for that, so I will paste manually.

Quote

Yet, according to the authors, “MSM have experienced a resurgent HIV epidemic in the [ARV treatment] era. Many HIV-infected MSM continue to engage in unsafe sex, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or other factors may promote genital HIV shedding and transmission in this population despite [ARV therapy]

The resurgence of HIV in the MSM community is definitely a big issue.

However, it's certainly not clear to me that the direct cause of that resurgence - or even one of the causes - is people who know they have HIV, are on treatment, have an undetectable viral load, and are barebacking with negative partners - and actually passing the virus (regardless of whether they are informing them of their status or not).

I don't believe there are any studies on that.

It would certainly be nice to have some data.

There are too many hypotheticals in so many situations that were not studied.I would really like answers to the following questions :

How likely is it for semen to actually have a detectable viral load ? As someone sexually active, I would actually like to have it tested along with all my other labs.

Can the impact of STIs on viral load in semen be quantified, and if so, which STIs cause it to rise most ?

Can the higher risk for anal sex vs vaginal sex be quantified also, when the insertive partner is the positive / undetectable one ?

Could it be possible instead that the resurgence of HIV has more to do with the fact that so-called "negative" guys are having more unprotected sex ? And that those people are either not getting tested as much as they should, and thus not getting treated because they don't know their status, and passing it on before they find out ? Or they are not getting proper treatment and not reaching undetectable viral load due to lack of access to meds or adherence issues ?None of these are new issues obviously, so it still begs the question of what triggers the resurgence.

Surely epidemiologists can run the math models - but it seems to me, if the frequency of unprotected sex in the community increases a lot, and the frequency of testing does not proportionally increase, even if everyone went on treatment and became undetectable immediately after finding out their positive status, there are going to be more infections between tests, not to mention the window period of the tests.

The issue is why so many people constantly and willingly put themselves at risk.

I can help you out with this one. When evaluating risks that others take, the first step is to get outside of yourself. "Would I take that risk?" is an irrelevant question because the risk is weighed against self worth. Some people have a lot, some have none, and, like a black hole, some have negative self worth that destroys the lives of everyone around them. (Hi.)

Example: would you risk your health, your life, your home, your kids, your [insert item of value here] for a night of risky sex/risky drugs/risky board games? It sounds like your answer would be "no", though I don't want to put words in your mouth unfairly.

If someone right now offered me an interesting evening that might end up with my contracting another fatal disease, I'd likely take it, because: a) I could use some laughs, b) I really have so little to lose it's not worth mentioning c) I simply don't value my life as much as you seem to value yours.

I'm not trying to be morbid, but these are uncomfortable truths we have to face if we want to change things in any meaningful way. You said:

It shocks me to no end the risks people take. They roll the dice. Some win some lose. But I can't help feeling, when the time comes, when we cure AIDS. What will be the next STD that's like it and will take it's place.

This is absolutely true. There will always be something. I would argue that the "Gay Men's Health Crisis" is not HIV alone, but HIV, Crystal Meth, the disinterested society we've cultivated which goes beyond anything Marx could have feared and technology-fueled nihilism concerning the value of human interdependence. We shouldn't be fighting AIDS. We should be fighting whatever it is that lets people hate themselves so easily that they'd just as soon destroy their lives one baggie at a time, one hookup at a time, one website at a time, as go to a park with a friend on a Saturday morning. I'm a bright shiny pixie compared to some people in the worlds that this article was touring. That should scare you.

However, it's certainly not clear to me that the direct cause of that resurgence - or even one of the causes - is people who know they have HIV, are on treatment, have an undetectable viral load, and are barebacking with negative partners - and actually passing the virus (regardless of whether they are informing them of their status or not).

I don't believe there are any studies on that.

My overarching question to you would be "what's the harm in erring on the side of caution?"

My actual response is quite a bit longer:

I wish I could help you with more info. My guess is that you're right: the direct cause is likely not people who know they have HIV, are on treatment, have an undetectable viral load, and are barebacking with negative partners. I hope I didn't give the impression that I believe that. I have no idea. My guess (just a guess) would be that two areas of increased transmission in MSM involve:

1) people who just don't care about life. I know plenty of these. I've personally been to more than one serodiscordant gathering where no one was seeking and no one was giving, but everyone knew it was mixed and no one gave a damn, because, well, why should they? These happen all the time. I hung out at one the other night because I had nowhere else to go. Fortunately, no one was into me, so I just went to sleep and didn't have to earn my keep. I'm not being sarcastic. I didn't really wanna be there, but we do what we must, and sometimes people let me hang out for other reasons. We're not even talking about pozzing parties. I don't know how common they are, but I know I could find one right now at this very minute if I wanted. I've wondered a couple of times, if it comes down to sleeping outside again or getting myself invited to an overnight conversion party, what would I do? It's been pretty cold outside lately, and I'm not really all that brave.

2) people who are positive and don't know it and thus have high viral loads and are very infectious. I would guess (again, guessing) that this is the larger group, because it cuts across other divisions (gay, straight, male, female, etc.).

You're probably aware, I wasn't even quoting the authors of the study. I was quoting the AIDSMeds.com article that quoted the authors of the study. My point for quoting at all, if it's of interest, is that anyone who has any sex should be prepared for the possibility that they may test HIV positive in the future. I don't say this to scare people. I think it's irresponsible to promote the idea that any of us are immune or "unlikely" to contract HIV. If a person is old enough to choose to have sex (I'm not even going into coercive sex here...), then they are old enough to consider the possibility that they may contract HIV, especially if their partner is HIV+, regardless of that partner's viral load. The study in question pointed out that even though the viral load of the blood plasma was UD, it was not necessarily UD in semen. Does this mean there's more or less risk? I don't know. The authors of that study were also hedging - they just suggested it was worth looking into, which it is.

If an HIV- person is OK with taking risks that are still being debated, more power to them. Or, if they read the studies and decide, "no, this isn't like the moon landing, it's settled fact, the risk is so small, I'm cool with it," then more power to them. But most people don't give it that much thought. They want the soundbite. And if all you have is a soundbite, I think it's better to err on the side of "be careful" than, "well 96% of people in double blind longitudinal...cohort...plasma...undetectable...msm..." yawn.. "What? I can safely fuck bareback, you said? Cool!"

Unless I'm the victim of a particularly cruel joke, then I passed it on to someone while doing what would be considered among the safest of activities. So, when I hear how safe it is for a undetectable guy to top a negative guy bareback, I cringe a little. Though if people are OK with that risk, that's up to them. I think they deserve to be told, though, especially if all the other voices are saying, "no, it's perfectly safe".

I feel like in an effort to make ourselves seem more "normal" some of us go out of our way to stress the *safety* of being with us. I fully appreciate that, and after the way people like us were treated in the past (and still today depending on where/when/who) that's a more than reasonable way to approach this. I honestly don't want to offend anyone, but I think we're a little more dangerous than we'd like to admit. So when there's leeway, some people lean toward, "no, it's perfectly safe, we're just like everybody else" while I lean toward, "no, my body fluids are potentially poison to you, you naive little HIV- person, you". The way I see it, we're wardens of a killer virus. Take your drugs, do as your doctor says, and if you're lucky, you can keep it inside you and live a nice, healthy life. But that's certainly not my story with this thing, and I've only had it a few months as far as I know.

I've let it out at least once before I knew I had it, and if I can keep one other person from getting it, maybe that saves my soul. Maybe I have no soul. I don't know. But I don't think I've been dishonest or misleading anywhere, and I do hope you'll point it out if I am or do. My emotions are perhaps clouding my judgement on this issue, but I'd wager that's true for all of us.

It was about 2010. About two years after I got HIV positive, Suddenly there seemed a lot more opportunities for me to have bareback sex with other HIV+ people and I started to.

Being undetectable and no other active STDS, I knew my risks for what I could transmit, but listen girls, I really was pretty DELUDED about Hep C and other STDs I could get. I knew, but didn't know.. I thought barebacking with casual partners was a little bonus I could indulge in and was risking the clap or syphillis. I got tested 2-3 times a year for everything...

We would even talk about "HIV+ - fit and healthy - don't want Hep C." So we were supposed to be "sorting". HAHAHAHAHAHA. Not. What a jerk I was.

I can't deny that my knowledge about Hep C was dated, I thought it was from blood - needles and/or fisting scenes.

Well, long story short - I got Hep C late last summer, or early fall, 2012. My ID doc recognised it in my October lab tests. I said, yes I had had intestinal cramps and yellow piss for two weeks. He said, well, you have Hep C, a new infection. But he said, that you noticed and have some symptoms - its a sign for some hope you might cure yourself. About a 20% chance he said, if i understood correctly. He said we can look at xmas time.

Long story short, I got my XMAS present, my body cured itself. I asked the doc what he meant when I said I was cured he said theres no more virus, its not coming back, you're cured. My last appointment, he said I could have cocktails again and had no liver damage.

I bet half of you know all this stuff.

My doc said he has seen a few waves of sexually transmitted Hep C. He told me i had been lucky and had dodged a serious challenge.

For the moment, since he diagnosed me in Oct, I am no longer barebacking.. I don't like that Im not. I just have to remember how nice it is to NOT have fucking STDs.....

Supposedly, the completely resistant CLAP, gonorrhoea, is showing up just about everywhere. That is going to be no picnic to treat, eventually. There are plenty of nasty STDs to go around and time will always produce some new ones...

If theres a critical mass now of HIV+ guys who are barebacking casually, we're all playing with fire...

And yeah, thats a new evolving mind-set for me.... So be kind if sometime I said rubs the wrong way. I wanted to give my experience about one such, ever changing, sexual custom... unprotected sex....

« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 11:15:58 AM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Sexually-transmitted hep C may be more common than people in the States realize for MSM. That whole "barebacking is fine if you're poz" rubs me funny too. I mean, it's fine with me, and if I'm ever sexually active again, I'll certainly not be using condoms, but I'm making a foolish choice, which I'm OK with, not an ignorant one, which is sad and preventable. I'm not deluding myself into thinking it's safe. But other people seem to be making this choice based on false information, and they would make a different choice if they were better informed. Tragic.

Do you find it harder to come out about Hep C than HIV? I can tell anyone about HIV, but I'm really embarrassed about the mumblemumble and the mumblemumblemumble that I had at the same time I was diagnosed HIV+. I had had a full STD screening a few months before, so I couldn't have had them long. There's no shame in any disease really, but the others make me feel kinda dirty in a way HIV just doesn't. I never felt dirty about HIV, in fact, and I really hate when people use "clean" to mean HIV-. Grrr... I bathe regularly, thank you very much.

I'm heading out the door in a couple of hours to get the second round of my meningitis vaccination. Public Service Announcement: if you're an MSM (man who has sex with men) in NYC, the health department advises you to get this vaccination, HIV+ or not, but especially if you're HIV+. Originally it was just HIV+ guys who lived in certain neighborhoods. They opened the recommendation up to all MSM, especially those who have used apps for hookups. Unless you segregate your sex partners by borough, you should probably ignore the geographic part of the recommendation. The vaccination is free at the health department or talk to your doctor.

Ann was/is entirely correct that anal sex is NOT entirely equivalent to vaginal sex. And thirty years into the pandemic, I have yet to see any large scale male/male serodiscordant couples' studies. Money routinely is funneled from other, more palatable outreach destinations to surreptitiously fund MSM outreach here in the states, because few governmental agencies want to be seen promoting "gay" sex, or "promiscuous" sex. Until such time as that changes (AIDS will be over) I cannot imagine huge, steady funding for MSM serodiscordant couples' studies. Not in the states at any rate.

Wasn't there some connection with this concept and the female condom like 20 years ago? I remember something about it being more effective at prevention or easier to use or something about gay men and HIV and female condoms, but that they couldn't print anything about it on the label even though it was true because you couldn't technically promote anything that endorsed gay sex before Lawrence v. Texas?

Anyone?

Please stop me if I'm spreading misinformation, but this was a long time ago, and I was concerned with other things at the time, like "what the hell happened to Ѣ in pre-Soviet Ukrainian" and other such vitally important topics.

There is a historical reason for this but you probably don't get the context being a decade or more younger than I am.

We're roughly the same age, you and I, but I would love to hear more about this anyway. I'm mostly unfamiliar with this "porn" thing that the rest of you talk about, but it seems vaguely interesting. Go on...

Anyway, I didn't mean to divert from the original topic, and I hope my response made sense. You just don't run into too many Bach fans around here. Or anywhere, really.

I know. Since you are one, I just made a new recording last week which had made it to my Youtube channel but not my blog. Here is the URL . I hope you like. I have been playing this piece for many years, but I got a new concert grand last year and I haven't done too many recordings with it. I plan on re-recording everything I have done on it, and hopefully more as I master new pieces, but there is only so much time as I'm a software engineer by day.

Being undetectable and no other active STDS, I knew my risks for what I could transmit, but listen girls, I really was pretty DELUDED about Hep C and what other STDs I could get. I knew, but didn't know..

People would even talk about "HIV+ - fit and healthy - don't want Hep C." So we were supposed to be "sorting". HAHAHAHAHAHA

I can't deny that my knowledge about Hep C was dated, I thought it was from blood - needles and/or fisting scenes.

Well, long story short - I got Hep C late last summer or early fall 2012. My ID doc recognised it in my lab tests and I said I had had intestinal cramps and yellow piss for two weeks. He said, well, thats a sign for some hope you might cure yourself. There's a 20% chance. Check in at XMAS.

I got my XMAS present, my body completely cured itself. I asked him to be sure, what does this mean, can I drink again, is my liver damaged, is it coming back. He said, yes, cocktails, no - liver damage. No - no immunity - I can get reinfected... Unlike Hep B for example.

He said, in his career, he has seen a few waves of sexually transmitted Hep C. He told me to count my blessings, I dodged a nasty one.

So, now I am no longer in the "bareback is ok between consenting HIV+ guys" set... I took risks, paid a price, but luckily, not the worst price possible.

Supposedly, the completely resistant CLAP, gonorrhoea, is showing up just about everywhere. There are plenty of nasty STDs to go around and time will always produce some new ones...

Ouch. Sorry to hear about that, but glad you dodged it.

That's one I haven't caught yet somehow, I guess it's probably in my future. Most poz guys that I have met want bareback or nothing else. I have caught chlamydia something like 5 times.

I started the year with a bang again - with some painful urination after I topped some guy bb once. But my labs have all come clean. Except for my syphilis test which has gone from negative to equivocal, even after the test was repeated. Ie. the lab can't figure out the result. I was prescribed doxy for 10 days based on symptoms. It helped while I was on it. Then after I was done, the symptoms came back. I actually texted a picture of my dick to my doc. He prescribed doxy again, for a longer 1-month course. I am OK now but still on it. I really hope it doesn't come back. This may be some sort of new bug.

I know. Since you are one, I just made a new recording last week which had made it to my Youtube channel but not my blog. Here is the URL . I hope you like. I have been playing this piece for many years, but I got a new concert grand last year and I haven't done too many recordings with it. I plan on re-recording everything I have done on it, and hopefully more as I master new pieces, but there is only so much time as I'm a software engineer by day.

Hey, nice! I learned that one on guitar a couple of years ago, because it's relatively easy for guitar as Bach goes. Not sure I could still do it, so perhaps not so easy. I used a side thing with Brahms' third symphony as an excuse to get out of C major which I've had a mild aversion to since December 2011. Everything is so, I dunno, clean with Bach, though. I should pick it back up. The C major aversion continues, bt I have to get over it someday. I'm not much of a musician anyway, but as a listener, Bach's such a palate cleanser. The anti-Romantic.

How'd you mic that thing? We used Neumann TLM 102s or 103s, - I can't remember - for the Steinway and God help me, I avoided the harpsichord because I was afraid of breaking it, and it cost a lot more than I did. Or do. I can't remember for the life of me how it was mic'ed, though it was a paired set of condensers of some kind. I was usually shut up in the closet anyway.

That's one I haven't caught yet somehow, I guess it's probably in my future. Most poz guys that I have met want bareback or nothing else. I have caught chlamydia something like 5 times.

Celibacy doesn't help. I got a call from the health department a couple weeks ago about an inconclusive test from November 20 (when I tested positive for HIV). I haven't had sex this year, and still I'm getting called to the health department. It never ends... Why it took them so long to reach me, I don't know, but I've stopped questioning the healthcare industry. I suddenly have deja vu, so sorry if I typed this already...

They tell me that the routine Gonnorhea test from November was inconclusive. "So I have the crazytown kind like in Toronto," I asked. "I don't know if you have it at all, and we don't call it 'that crazytown kind'". So he offers to test me again or just give me the antibiotics and get tested again later. (wtf?) I didn't think doctors did that, but one benefit of being a VIP client apparently is no-questions-asked antibiotics on demand. Considering everything else I tested positive for that day, super-Gonorrhea is not a stretch. I would prefer no one come at me with a 6-inch swab of any kind, so I opted for the shot of Ceftriaxone and 2 pastillas of Azithromycin. I had also just been on two months of doxycycline (hey, you too!) plus my new friend Stribild, so I'm fairly certain there is nothing alive in me right now. Which may explain the loneliness (haha).

Note to everyone on Stribild who doesn't have a primary care physician or sees multiple doctors:Ceftriaxone is on the long list of things that might (I emphasize might) cause an adverse reaction when combined with cobicistat. It's less an adverse reaction and more to do with cobicistat's ability to raise the levels of other substances in the blood. That's what liver-enzyme suppressants are used for and why it's in your pill in the first place. Do not expect non-HIV specialists to realize that there's a liver-enzyme suppressing component to your pill, because it's novel among the one-pill combos, and they're very busy people. The comparable Norvir is less likely to be overlooked since it comes in its own pill and is FDA approved for use in its own right. Cobicistat is not. This isn't something to freak out about, but a quick Google search for any new medications you're given + cobicistat won't kill anyone. The life you save may be your own.

I'm getting a general followup with my meningitis vaccine here in a little while, in fact, I need to head out now. I imagine if I had the resistant strain, I'd be dead already, so I'm not too worried. That would get me into HASA at least, so hey, always look on the bright side.

But why would there more of these desperate or careless people now ? I don't see how this factor can explain the rise in HIV transmission.

Quote

2) people who are positive and don't know it and thus have high viral loads and are very infectious. I would guess (again, guessing) that this is the larger group, because it cuts across other divisions (gay, straight, male, female, etc.).

Yes, that is my guess as well. But of course we don't know exactly how many of these people there are. The estimates I have read in the past were 25% of the HIV MSM population in the US are undiagnosed.

Quote

You're probably aware, I wasn't even quoting the authors of the study. I was quoting the AIDSMeds.com article that quoted the authors of the study.

Actually, no, I didn't realize that.

Quote

If a person is old enough to choose to have sex (I'm not even going into coercive sex here...), then they are old enough to consider the possibility that they may contract HIV,

I certainly agree with that.

Quote

If an HIV- person is OK with taking risks that are still being debated, more power to them. Or, if they read the studies and decide, "no, this isn't like the moon landing, it's settled fact, the risk is so small, I'm cool with it," then more power to them. But most people don't give it that much thought. They want the soundbite. And if all you have is a soundbite, I think it's better to err on the side of "be careful" than, "well 96% of people in double blind longitudinal...cohort...plasma...undetectable...msm..." yawn.. "What? I can safely fuck bareback, you said? Cool!"

My anecdotal experience is that 95% of the HIV- people I talk to do not want to read any studies. Sex education does not teach about of the risk factor of undetectable HIV viral load. It teaches that HIV is bad, period. Most people just choose to stay away altogether, even though the combination of condom use and undetectable viral load might be as safe as it gets when HIV transmission is concerned. It's certainly far safer than bb with some random "negative" person, statistically, as long as there are so many people undiagnosed and not on treatment.

Quote

Unless I'm the victim of a particularly cruel joke, then I passed it on to someone while doing what would be considered among the safest of activities.

I'm not privvy to your situation. You mentioned oral sex transmission. I personally believe it's possible, and it may have been the route of transmission for me. There is no test that can determine the specific sex act, or indeed, the specific route (sex or needles, etc) that the virus took. When sexually transmitted, as far as I know, the best you can do is look at the HIV genotype for two positive individuals, and determine that it is the same virus that was passed between the two. I don't even think it's even possible to tell which one got it first.

Quote

So, when I hear how safe it is for a undetectable guy to top a negative guy bareback, I cringe a little. Though if people are OK with that risk, that's up to them. I think they deserve to be told, though, especially if all the other voices are saying, "no, it's perfectly safe".

It's quite obviously not perfectly safe for a variety of things, all kinds of other bugs can pass through.The question I think you meant to ask is whether it's perfectly safe as far as HIV transmission is concerned. The science is not out on that.

The fundamental problem is that there is no way for somebody to prove to their partner that they are HIV negative at the time they are having sex. That's because the test has a window period which can show false negatives. A negative test only proves that the person was negative at the time of the test, less the window period. Even if two people take an instant test together and both test HIV-, it isn't a guarantee that one or both isn't actually positive. If they are OK to bareback in that situation, how does the risk compare with barebacking with a positive/undetectable partner ?

If they are both sexually active with multiple partners, the risk may be far higher in the first case than the second.

And if they are not, the first situation has lower risk than the second, but the risk in the second case still needs to be quantified. It could still be statistically the same. But sexual history is something you can only take at face value - there is no test for that.

From the study on semen viral load :

Quote

For example, whereas the average free-floating viral load was 4,438 copies among those with detectable blood-based HIV levels, it was 51 copies among those with undetectable blood-based HIV levels.

It still remains to be determined how dangerous 51 copies/mL of semen actually are. That's an awfully low number, though. My lab only tests my blood level to 75 copies. I wish they tested my seminal level. Kaiser would have to provide the porn in the lab, though. Or just unlock access to porn sites on their Wifi network (the 4G has no signal inside the hospital).

I will say that I had a condom accident that I related years ago in this forum, with a partner who was negative. I was not on meds, but my blood VL was always very low since diagnosis, mostly under 1000. On what was to be our last sexual encounter, the condom exploded when I came. That person got PEP and ultimately did not contract the virus, after repeated HIV tests. Of course, this is anecdotal. But I have to believe that the risk of transmission with 51 copies/ml must be quite low.

Quote

I honestly don't want to offend anyone, but I think we're a little more dangerous than we'd like to admit. So when there's leeway, some people lean toward, "no, it's perfectly safe, we're just like everybody else" while I lean toward, "no, my body fluids are potentially poison to you, you naive little HIV- person, you".

The way I see it, we're wardens of a killer virus. Take your drugs, do as your doctor says, and if you're lucky, you can keep it inside you and live a nice, healthy life. But that's certainly not my story with this thing, and I've only had it a few months as far as I know.

I've let it out at least once before I knew I had it, and if I can keep one other person from getting it, maybe that saves my soul. Maybe I have no soul. I don't know. But I don't think I've been dishonest or misleading anywhere, and I do hope you'll point it out if I am or do. My emotions are perhaps clouding my judgement on this issue, but I'd wager that's true for all of us.

I don't believe in soul, though that may not make it any easier to deal with.I think after years living with the virus and being on meds and UD, your perspective will likely change.Your emotions won't change the evidence about transmission.

I do engage with sex with (self-reported) negative partners. When I do, I point them to the studies and ask them to read them. I do tell them they are on heterosexual couples and vaginal sex and don't directly apply, and indeed that seminal VL can be higher than blood VL. Of the few who have actually bothered to read them and follow through, only one ever asked to see a copy of my labs showing undetectable VL. And only two have ever asked for bareback.

Hey, nice! I learned that one on guitar a couple of years ago, because it's relatively easy for guitar as Bach goes. Not sure I could still do it, so perhaps not so easy. I used a side thing with Brahms' third symphony as an excuse to get out of C major which I've had a mild aversion to since December 2011. Everything is so, I dunno, clean with Bach, though. I should pick it back up. The C major aversion continues, bt I have to get over it someday. I'm not much of a musician anyway, but as a listener, Bach's such a palate cleanser. The anti-Romantic.

I mostly play in G major - have been working on them for over 10 years, since I started the piano, basically. I don't start with easy stuff. But I wouldn't be motivated to play with the easy stuff, also.

Quote

How'd you mic that thing? We used Neumann TLM 102s or 103s, - I can't remember -

If you go to the Youtube channel and look at the info in the video, is is actually listed there.I don't own any expensive mikes. No Neumanns in my house. I have a bunch of relatively cheap mikes, 9 in total. I recorded simultaneously with all of them. For that recording I selected 2. One small condensor M-audio Pulsar II, and one Sterling audio ST66.

Quote

for the Steinway and God help me, I avoided the harpsichord because I was afraid of breaking it, and it cost a lot more than I did. Or do. I can't remember for the life of me how it was mic'ed, though it was a paired set of condensers of some kind. I was usually shut up in the closet anyway.

I recorded my former teacher's harpsichord (and piano) with a pair of AKG C3000B.

Well obviously the situation with HEP C seems just like HIV. There are people who don't know they have it and they are transmitting it. Or, they know, but don't announce it. As with HIV, I don't think all that many guys would have active Hep C and conduct themselves like Typhoid Hep C Mary on purpose.

Since there were a few weeks between when I got it and my ID identified it, I could have spread it as well!

The way the doctor explained it..... I am cured, no hep C. Not remission. NOt low viral load. Clearance.

Also, he said i am NOT IMMUNE. Its not like other Heps. You can get infected again... I will assume he is correct -- anyone have counter information...

Anyhoo, I mentioned it in this thread about barebacking moms and barebacking heteros....

I get the impression there's a growing, critical mass of HIV+ guys casually barebacking, more every year. And I am proof - HEP C is transmitted from hot bareback fucks.. You don't need to be into fisting and what not.

And now this incurable clap, on the way..

The situation seems a bit ominous... If the walls of the anus aren't all that protective, and some of us are going to join into a bareback culture, I dunno..... Ding dong.... I'll opt out for the moment, but no promises.

In any event. Isn't it more pleasurable to be able to drink wine for the rest of your life then to have some fleeting hot sensations of unprotected sex.

Im going to try to find a steady. This is getting dangerous and tired, so wrapping up should keep me safe until I can find someone to trust.....

« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 11:34:09 AM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

However, there is accumulating evidence of hepatitis C transmissions not linked to injecting drug use among HIV-positive gay men. These infections appear to be due to traumatic sexual practices such as fisting and non-injecting drug use, especially in the context of group sex.

Much of this evidence comes from Europe. However, hepatitis C infections in the absence of injecting drug use have also been reported among HIV-positive gay men in New York and other US cities. But low rates of baseline screening have made it difficult to accurately assess incidence of hepatitis C among HIV-infected gay men in the US.

See, that's me in those statistics... London Paris Berlin Zurich, I see so much bareback everywhere....

Also, this is where i was naive. And where these studies are NOT clear enough for guiding some of us hot pigs... I thought i was going to be avoiding Hep C by NOT fisthing, not going to fisting parties. And my party drugs days were over even before I got HIV! And that information about party drugs is so freaking vague, anyway.

It seems to come down to this fragile butthole fact. And you don't need to be fisting, or going to gangbangs, or getting blotto on drugs, to rip up the butthole.. Some of us go at it with gusto, no chems required....

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

I assume it's related to sharing "insufflation apparatus" which we all know routinely happens pretty much everywhere in urban gay culture, and has for decades. This is why I've always had difficulty knowing how much non-fisting sex-related transmissions there are, not to mention everything is based on self-reporting.

We shouldn't be fighting AIDS. We should be fighting whatever it is that lets people hate themselves so easily that they'd just as soon destroy their lives one baggie at a time, one hookup at a time, one website at a time, as go to a park with a friend on a Saturday morning. I'm a bright shiny pixie compared to some people in the worlds that this article was touring. That should scare you.

You've totally hit the nail on the head !!! I also have ton of self worth issues and have had to constantly fight. I'm also just burned out from fighting all my fights. I'm tired of feeling so alone all the time.

When I interact with other gay men on these social networks. It's like I'm looking through the looking glass. I know dating is possible, I know a partner is out there for me somewhere. But we constantly strive for perfection. We look for it in our bodies and lives and everything and we see imperfections as something we run away from. Straight, gay, whatever.

Because no one feels like they're on equal footing, that no one feels like they're on sturdy ground. The bonds that make our communities and culture strong aren't forming.

When I interact with other gay men on these social networks. It's like I'm looking through the looking glass. I know dating is possible, I know a partner is out there for me somewhere. But we constantly strive for perfection. We look for it in our bodies and lives and everything and we see imperfections as something we run away from. Straight, gay, whatever.

Perfection? I just ask that he not steal my wallet. Anything above that, and I'm off to the chapel. I'll let you know if it ever happens.

I get the impression there's a growing, critical mass of HIV+ guys casually barebacking, more every year. And I am proof - HEP C is transmitted from hot bareback fucks.. You don't need to be into fisting and what not.

You boys and your impossible standards. Now it has to be "hot" sex as well? Who can live up to this, I ask you, who‽